# The Bible - Before Man **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 17, 2003, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176 "2003-09-17T17:34:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![t-keela](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a3d4f5/32.png) [@t-keela](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/t-keela)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/181 "2003-09-22T19:27:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*We’re not talking about criticism, we’re talking about _translating_. What does believing in God have to do with whether he can translate from Hebrew to English? \*\* **D/C** I can’t believe you actually said this after the time you have spent on this thread and many others with people who seem to have their own interpretation of “scripture” when translating **English to English** (much less Hebrew to English)…this is IMHO due to an already biased opinion/belief. disclaimer: Doesn’t mean you can’t either, just be damned careful. One reason science does blind/double blind studies. BTW: Isn’t that one of the main problems with the KJV? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![RoundGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90ced4/32.png) [@RoundGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RoundGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/182 "2003-09-22T22:24:30Z")
**Svt4Him** > [@](#): > > I don’t really care if he doesn’t believe in magic and fairies, as I don’t really either, Yet you believe in miracles and angels. Uh, ok… ---
**Author:** ![Rodrigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Rodrigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodrigo)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/183 "2003-09-23T14:57:49Z")
Just why would the Bible mention the damned dinosaurs? Poor Moses would lose precious time explaining them to a bunch of guys who two weeks before had just come out of the stone age. I think God thought “maybe I’ll tell Moses to concentrate on the really important stuff”. Most great books TODAY don’t mention them, and having lost most of my childhood love of them I really don’t care. It is one of those things Christians should no longebe asked. Not due to any theological problem, but because when you hear it 99% of the time is just trying to make fun of you And just to correct what someone mentioned. The Catholic Church OFFICIALLY believes that the Bible is free from ALL error, when read as it is supposed to. Genesis 1 and 2 were not intended for Doctoral courses in cosmology. Pope John Paul II talked about evolution in general not Darwinian or Materialistic evolution (A good read of Humani Generis would make many people a lot of good) * * * Mom, it was already broken when I got there. ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/184 "2003-09-23T16:12:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Rodrigo \* > \*\*Just why would the Bible mention the damned dinosaurs? \*\* To my mind, the problem is not so much that the Bible doesn’t mention them, but that no other contemporary documents mention them, either. IF dinosaurs and man were contemporaneous, as some literalists would have us believe, then _someone_, _somewhere_ at the time would have made mention of the fact. A _Tyrannosaurus_ rampaging through a marketplace is bound to have merited mention. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/185 "2003-09-23T16:20:21Z")
> [@](#): > > Pope John Paul II talked about evolution in general not Darwinian or Materialistic evolution What other kind of evolution is there? ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/186 "2003-09-23T16:27:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*What other kind of evolution is there? \*\* The type that many mistaken creationists believe exists. You know the type; “No one has ever witnessed a banana sprout legs and walk off a table, therefore evolution is invalid”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![ammo52](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/73ab20/32.png) [@ammo52](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ammo52)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/187 "2003-09-23T17:12:55Z")
> [@](#): > > It is one of those things Christians should no longebe asked. Not due to any theological problem, but because when you hear it 99% of the time is just trying to make fun of you It’s not done in the spirit of “making fun” of you. You (and other Christians) are asked logical questions which attempt to get at, or better understand, a belief system that can cling to an illogical position even in the face of logical arguments and rational facts, which do not reconcile with biblical accounts. I’m sure you’d put a great _many_ things on the “do not ask” list, because of the discomfort caused by the realization that something is wrong with your scripture. That you suffer from cognitive dissonance is not the problem of the people pointing out facts to you, though – it springs from what you do with that information within your own mind. ---
**Author:** ![RoundGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90ced4/32.png) [@RoundGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RoundGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/188 "2003-09-24T03:14:03Z")
> [@](#): > > when read as it is supposed to. Translation: _when read as the church says it’s supposed to be read_ ---
**Author:** ![Rodrigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Rodrigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodrigo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/189 "2003-09-24T03:32:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*What other kind of evolution is there? \*\* For example Lanmarckianism (SP?) I know it is outdates and very few believe in it (Although many Darwinians some Lanmarckians when they say the environment CAUSED the evolution). You haven’t read _Humani Generis_ have you? We Cahtolics can acknolwdge that animals (including humans) evolved biologically but not that the human soul could evolve. ammo 52 said “It’s not done in the spirit of “making fun” of you.” ( **Yeah, right, I’ve seen those smart ass faces too many times** ) " You (and other Christians) are asked logical questions which attempt to get at, or better understand, a belief system that can cling to an illogical position even in the face of logical arguments and rational facts, which do not reconcile with biblical accounts. ( \*\*And you became a Bible expert when? And no, the question is "Hey why doesn’t your belief system work with MINE? (this is for you)Can you PROVE your “logical” system 100% of the time? (of course you know you can’t say “I know my system works because my system proves it”, that’s circular reasoning\*\* ) I’m sure you’d put a great many things on the “do not ask” list, because of the discomfort caused by the realization that something is wrong with your scripture **I feel no discomfort (thanks for reading my mind…) it’s just that one gets tired of those questions when asked by people who can’t tell the difference between RNA and M&M’s. Everyday I answer questions about religion** ---
**Author:** ![Rodrigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Rodrigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodrigo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/190 "2003-09-24T03:37:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RoundGuy \* > \*\*Translation: _when read as the church says it’s supposed to be read_ \*\* And I guess you figured the whole world all by yourself, no-one influenced you. You figured the speed of light AND Pi AND the list of Byzantine emperors AND the Carbon content of Wootz steel AND the effect of cow-fart in global warming. Or…you like everyone else submit to someone else’s authority (even if using your intelligence to determine some of the stuff) …but I digress ---
**Author:** ![RoundGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90ced4/32.png) [@RoundGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RoundGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/191 "2003-09-24T04:01:37Z")
I notice you did not disagree with my “translation”. > [@](#): > > And I guess you figured the whole world all by yourself, no-one influenced you. Of course I am influenced. But I do not take something as truth just because someone, or some institution, tells me to. I investigate it for myself. > [@](#): > > Or…you like everyone else submit to someone else’s authority Only when absolutely necessary, and certainly not based on what a “church” says. > [@](#): > > …but I digress That is patently obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/192 "2003-09-24T04:15:17Z")
> [@](#): > > For example Lanmarckianism (SP?) I know it is outdates and very few believe in it (Although many Darwinians some Lanmarckians when they say the environment CAUSED the evolution). > > You haven’t read Humani Generis have you? We Cahtolics can acknolwdge that animals (including humans) evolved biologically but not that the human soul could evolve. Actually, I _have_ read the _Humani Generis_. Basically it claims the the Church has no official position on evolution except that to state that it does not necessarily conflict with Church doctrine as long as it is acknowledged that God is the ultimate creator and that (as you said) the human soul is a result of divine creation, not evolution. It does not address the science of evolution or attempt to take a position on the relative merits of Darwinian selection vs. Lamarckism (and those are merely mechanistic theories of evolution, btw. They both accept the fact of common descent but hypothesize different mechanisms for how it occurs. Lamarckism has now been discredited and Darwin’s Natural Selection has won out). I was confused by tyour statement that the HG does not necessarily address Darwinian or “materialistic” evolution. I don’t know what you mean by “materialistic” evolution. If you mean common descent or if possibly you’re saying that it could have been talking about ID I have to say that while the document does not endorse any particular model of evolution it doesn’t exclude any either. Evolutionary science makes no attempt to say anything at all about the human soul, btw. There are no scientists who are trying to say that the human soul “evolved.” This would be a foolish claim from a scientific standpoint since it can’t be proven that a human soul even exists in the first place. Finally, although Lamarckism is now defunct as a mechanistic model, I think it can be said that _figuratively_, the environment causes, or at least contributes to evolution in the sense that species adapt over time to their environments. They just don’t do it the way that Lamarck thought they did. ---
**Author:** ![Blink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b38774/32.png) [@Blink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blink)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 11:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/193 "2003-09-24T11:13:47Z")
I love dipping into threads as a complete outsider. Gives you an interesting perspective. My impression, as an outsider is that: 1. The most prolific posters in this thread have entrenched viewpoints. 2. They believe that they have arrived at those viewpoints logically. 3. They overrate logic. 4. They continually misinterpret the points made by “opponents” whether wilfully or inadvertantly. 5. The continually pick and fuss over minor points in “opponents’” arguments. I can’t actually tell if anyone is _enjoying_ this debate. For sure, one side seems to enjoy it when members of that side’s team “scores a point”. But to me it seems that a debate that resolves into point scoring does little to progress the debate and much to generate heat, pride and pointless puffing of chests. The original point to this thread seemed to be, “Why doesn’t the Bible mention dinosaurs.” Answer: some people interpret the Bible as mentioning a dinosaur like creature. Academics more educated (if that were possible) than those represented in this thread eloquently argue for and against this interpretation. That argument appears to be inconclusive. (And no I can’t be bothered to cite references. I don’t mind if you wish to say “Blink is making this up”, if that makes your precarious position appear more tenable.) The Bible says nothing explicitly about dinosaurs, in a language that 21st Century man understands. This should not surprise us. I am sure that none of the many writers of scripture ever intended the book to be a biology treatise. Furthermore, on virtually any view (bar the most odd fundamentalist view) none of the writers can ever have seen a tyrannosaur or a pterodon. If NightUK’s representation of his conversation with the priest is complete and accurate, and if the priest’s sole reason for expelling him from the church was the question referred to, then that priest must have been an insecure, unsettled man. How would expelling from the church someone without faith achieve the aims of scripture? Sounds like a “members only” kind of mentality, which isn’t IMHO what the Bible’s about, whether or not you choose to follow it/believe in it. Blink PS I have posted on many other message boards before. Enough to know that you will probably immedaitely wonder why a newbie would post such a long, windy post. I assure you that this is my first post here, and I am not a returning former member under an alias. I am also not going to prove that to you. (Some of you would doubtless refuse to accept my proof.) ---
**Author:** ![Blink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b38774/32.png) [@Blink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blink)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/194 "2003-09-24T11:23:44Z")
PPS Someone please now dazzle me with your superior knowledge and highly developed reasoning skills. ---
**Author:** ![Rodrigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Rodrigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodrigo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/195 "2003-09-24T13:23:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\* > A)Actually, I _have_ read the _Humani Generis_. Basically it claims the the Church has no official position on evolution except that to state that it does not necessarily conflict with Church doctrine as long as it is acknowledged that God is the ultimate creator and that (as you said) the human soul is a result of divine creation, not evolution. > > B)…Darwin’s Natural Selection has won out). > > C)…If you mean common descent or if possibly you’re saying that it could have been talking about ID I have to say that while the document does not endorse any particular model of evolution it doesn’t exclude any either. > > D)Finally, although Lamarckism is now defunct as a mechanistic model, I think it can be said that _figuratively_, the environment causes, or at least contributes to evolution in the sense that species adapt over time to their environments. They just don’t do it the way that Lamarck thought they did. \*\* A) OK with that B) At least for now (for those who believe it’s true). Science is always improving. C) By “materialistic” I meant without God’s intervention in any way at all, in any moment, even at creation an setting up the rules. D) I know, you’re right. But aren’t scientists supposed NOT be be figurative and only factual?. (I still think many Darwinians are closet Lamarckians) * * * RoundGuy said: Only when absolutely necessary, and certainly not based on what a “church” says. Yes, you do it according to what a “school of thought” says. Don’t tell me you figured out the Scientific Method or Logic by yourself. We all have a “church” we believe. * * * Hey, Blink, you’re on the money. ---
**Author:** ![Papermache\_Prince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f05b48/32.png) [@Papermache\_Prince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Papermache_Prince)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/196 "2003-09-24T13:46:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Blink \* > \*\*. . . > The original point to this thread seemed to be, “Why doesn’t the Bible mention dinosaurs.” > > Answer: some people interpret the Bible as mentioning a dinosaur like creature. Academics more educated (if that were possible) than those represented in this thread eloquently argue for and against this interpretation. That argument appears to be inconclusive. (And no I can’t be bothered to cite references. I don’t mind if you wish to say “Blink is making this up”, if that makes your precarious position appear more tenable.)\*\* I don’t think the position “the large majority of educated people believe that dinosaurs died out millions of years before the appearance of man” is a precarious position at all. You have asserted the claim; until you provide some citation to support it, I have no reason to think other than that “you’re making this up.” ---
**Author:** ![Blink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b38774/32.png) [@Blink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blink)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/197 "2003-09-24T13:56:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Papermache Prince \* > \*\*I don’t think the position “the large majority of educated people believe that dinosaurs died out millions of years before the appearance of man” is a precarious position at all. You have asserted the claim; \*\* Er… no I didn’t. I suggest you re-read. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/198 "2003-09-24T14:12:40Z")
The fact that some people tenaciously cling to a position does not mean that the argument is inconclusive. If I maintain that the earth is flat does that mean there is still an argument? Whether the earth is round or flat remains inconclusive? ---
**Author:** ![Papermache\_Prince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f05b48/32.png) [@Papermache\_Prince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Papermache_Prince)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/199 "2003-09-24T14:12:46Z")
Oh, dear. I fear you are correct – that was not your point. My apologies. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176/200 "2003-09-24T14:13:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Blink \* > \*\*I love dipping into threads as a complete outsider. Gives you an interesting perspective. > > My impression, as an outsider is that: > > 1. The most prolific posters in this thread have entrenched viewpoints.\*\* On some issues they do. > [@](#): > > **2. They believe that they have arrived at those viewpoints logically.** Some have, some haven’t. > [@](#): > > **3. They overrate logic.** This is a debate forum. You’re _supposed_ to use logic in a debate. What _else_ would you use? > [@](#): > > **4. They continually misinterpret the points made by “opponents” whether wilfully or inadvertantly.** Example? > [@](#): > > **5. The continually pick and fuss over minor points in “opponents’” arguments.** Example? > [@](#): > > \*\*I can’t actually tell if anyone is _enjoying_ this debate. For sure, one side seems to enjoy it when members of that side’s team “scores a point”. But to me it seems that a debate that resolves into point scoring does little to progress the debate and much to generate heat, pride and pointless puffing of chests. \*\* Of course we enjoy it. We wouldn’t be here if we didn’t. What would be the difference between “point scoring” and p"progressing the debate" in your opinion? > [@](#): > > \*\*The original point to this thread seemed to be, “Why doesn’t the Bible mention dinosaurs.” > > Answer: some people interpret the Bible as mentioning a dinosaur like creature. Academics more educated (if that were possible) than those represented in this thread eloquently argue for and against this interpretation.\*\* Incorrect. Educated academics argue only _against_ it. There is virtually no scholarly argument _for_ it at all, even among the majority of purely religious scholarship. The only argument _for_ this kind of nonsense comes from unaccredited Bible colleges and the like. You will not find any serious Biblical criticism gives even a second’s thought to interpreting “behemoth” as a dinosaur. > [@](#): > > **That argument appears to be inconclusive. (And no I can’t be bothered to cite references. I don’t mind if you wish to say “Blink is making this up”, if that makes your precarious position appear more tenable.)** There _is_ no argument. The Bible does not mention dinosaurs and no serious scholarship argues that it does. You can’t cite references because they don’t exist. > [@](#): > > **The Bible says nothing explicitly about dinosaurs, in a language that 21st Century man understands.** It says nothing about dinosaurs, period. Language has nothing to do with it. > [@](#): > > **This should not surprise us. I am sure that none of the many writers of scripture ever intended the book to be a biology treatise.** Dinosaurs would have been pretty hard to ignore. We’re not talking about some obscure species of butterfly here. > [@](#): > > **Furthermore, on virtually any view (bar the most odd fundamentalist view) none of the writers can ever have seen a tyrannosaur or a pterodon.** Which is exactly why the Bible _can’t_ say anything about dinosaurs. > [@](#): > > **If NightUK’s representation of his conversation with the priest is complete and accurate, and if the priest’s sole reason for expelling him from the church was the question referred to, then that priest must have been an insecure, unsettled man. How would expelling from the church someone without faith achieve the aims of scripture? Sounds like a “members only” kind of mentality, which isn’t IMHO what the Bible’s about, whether or not you choose to follow it/believe in it.** No argument here. > [@](#): > > \*\*Blink > > PS I have posted on many other message boards before. Enough to know that you will probably immedaitely wonder why a newbie would post such a long, windy post. I assure you that this is my first post here, and I am not a returning former member under an alias. I am also not going to prove that to you. (Some of you would doubtless refuse to accept my proof.) \*\* Board rules forbid us to accuse anybody of puppetry. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bible-before-man/202176.md?page=11)